The morning after pill, in case you’re unfamiliar, “prevents pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex.” The manufacturer of the pill is supposed to change the labeling, so it won’t be available until that happens. But is this really a good idea?

As someone who is adopted, I can’t help thinking that perhaps my birth mother, who would have been scared and wondering what she should do when she found out she was pregnant, would have had the option to just take a pill to get rid of me. Is that right? When teens are so young and vulnerable as it is?

I recently met my birth mother and she admits being scared and confused when she found out she was pregnant. This even goes beyond the abortion debate, but I’m trying to picture an impulsive teen going into the pharmacy to get a pill to end a possible pregnancy. Shouldn’t we at least require that teen to talk to someone first?

What are your thoughts on this?

Image: sxc.hu.

Post from: Blisstree

Morning After Pill: Adoptee Perspective

I make a distinction between wanting to kill a baby – which is no “right” I feel compelled to defend – and enforcing personal autonomy over women’s bodies and this includes ferility, having many babies and large families, medicine, battery and rape within marriage, etc.

I came to my pro-choice stance in college reading the science fiction classic, Ender’s Game, written by Orson Scott Card. In the book, America has put a limit on the number of children families can have to preserve resources. But, they are looking for a genius child to save the world so they test certain bright children and allow a few families to have 3 children.

Fundamentally I want the government and all other entities to stay out of my womb. Period.

It may sound far-fetched, but China has been doing this for decades. I’ve heard many people say they think the government should legislate or regulate fertility treatments because of Nadya Suleman’s Octuplets and such responsibility should be prevented and we shouldn’t have to pay for it. Next thing you know we’re telling Michelle Duggar she can’t have any more children because who would want 19 children? Then were prosecuting people who try to have a singleton after a multiple birth.

No way. I defend Octimom’s right to have as many children as she wants. I defend my right to have only two. I defend Roe v. Wade only as a defense of physcial autonomy for women.

Think Ender’s Game is ”just a book?” So was The Communist Manefesto, The Bible, and Fatherland.

The entire universe was created with the words “Let there be light.” 

I defend her right to choose. I defend her right to reproduce I defend every single woman’s physical autonomy.

Post from: Blisstree

Octimom, Choice, Life, & Science Fiction

No one cares about your personal beliefs Sarah.

The questions are referring to whether you would pass laws that would hold US to your beliefs.

That’s what we have a right to know.

Post from: Blisstree

Sarah Palin on Abortion, Morning After Pill & Science

It’s such a tight rope women walk in today’s world.

Republicans claim to want to reduce the abortion rate.

Republicans claim to think it’s wrong when women who work fulltime and “abandon their children in daycare.”

Republicans claim to hate “entitlement programs” that cost them tax money.

I have to wonder why, when facing a solution to 3 of their main concerns with universal healthcare, they are not jumping on board with glee.

If women have equal access to healthcare they can prevent conception, the most effective means of drastically lowering the abortion rate.

If women have equal access to healthcare they can more easily work fewer hours, more flexible hours untied to corporate 40 in-office hour work weeks, resulting in more face time with their children. In other words – Mary Kay Lady takes on a whole new level of stability.

If women have equal access to healthcare they are less likely to seek prenatal care and give birth with taxpayer money, thus reducing women’s reliance on “entitlement programs.”

Not to mention all the kids who currently receive SCHIPS because they can’t get health insurance due to pre-existing conditions. With both Democrats’ healthcare reforms “pre-existing conditions” (read: any diagnosis) are overruled and EVERYONE gets equal access.

I have to wonder if they really are looking for solutions or if they are getting something out of having these problems to bitch about?

Perhaps they just hate women?

I think they might be getting more out of having these problems than they would by solving them.

Stop Abortion Vote Healthcare!

Healthcare Corruption

Post from: Blisstree

Healthcare Solves 3 GOP Concerns

I found the most interesting facts to be these two:

* The abortion rate is the lowest its been since Roe v. Wade in 1973, with 1.21 million in 2005.

* About 60% of abortions are obtained by women who have one or more children.

Unlike teenagers who only sought 17% of abortions, these women fully understand the responsibility and the cost of parenthood and family-life.

• Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals;
• Three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents;
• Half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.

The key to preventing unwanted pregnancy and therefore preventing abortion is access to healthcare.

• Contraceptive non-use is greatest among those who are young, poor, black, Hispanic or less educated women.
• About half of unintended pregnancies occur among the 11% of women who are at risk for unintended pregnancy but are not using contraceptives.

That’s exactly the same demographic that currently has the least access to healthcare in America.

Compared with men, women are less likely to have employer-sponsored health care coverage because they are more likely to work part-time, on contract, or freelance and to take time out of the workforce to care for their children and their family members. They are also more likely to be covered as dependents on their spouses’ employer-sponsored health plans. As a result, women are more vulnerable to losing their coverage if they are widowed or divorced.

There are 21.5 million uninsured women and these are the same women who are most likely to seek an abortion because they have no access to healthcare. This statistic doesn’t even include women who carry only catastrophic insurance and therefore have to pay for all healthcare expenses on top of their high premiums. These women frequently can’t afford basic OB/GYN care, including contraception.

No one likes abortion. If the goal is to reduce the number of abortions in the United States then pro-lifers should jump on the opportunity to drastically reduce the number of lives lost by providing equal and affordable access to healthcare for women.

People who rate abortion as the most important issue in America, should consider the flip side. Let’s say you win. Roe v. Wade is overturned. The number of abortions won’t be zero. What about all the women who will inevitably seek an abortion illegally? Now we’re back to back-alley butchering of women.

The result is not only the death of babies, but the needless death of women and babies. We now know these women are mothers of other children and therefore the inevitable outcome is the death of women, the death of their fetuses and the orphaning of existing children. As a fellow Christian – I can’t see how that is better.

What’s changed about the pro-life vs. pr-choice debate? Access to healthcare for these disenfranchised women has never been on the table before. (This could also drastically reduce the cost of adoption for middle-class couples.)

If you truly want to prevent the nasty business of abortion – you should vote for healthcare. Not because you’re turning your back on your principles – but because it’s the most effective way to prevent abortion.

Post from: Blisstree

Stop Abortion Vote Healthcare!